Could a Man have written this?

Blame the Sexual Revolution not Men.

Mona Charen had a very concise critique of  the overwritten personal ad that passed for Kate Bolick’s life’s confession, All the Single Ladies.

I wont say that I don’t admire Mona for having the courage to write a less than favorable critique; particularly one that points the blame back on a feminization that enthusiastically looks to reinvent it’s own social conventions in order to rationalize away the post-Wall dire straits women like Bolick are finding themselves in. However, is anyone really surprised that it’s now women receiving public recognition for acknowledging psychological and sociological principles and dynamics that the manosphere has covered for over a decade now?

I’m glad to see it getting the publicity, but ONLY a woman could write this without suffering fem-screech backlash accusations of misogyny. This is the environment we’re in today. I have no doubt that Ms. Charen will receive her share of frothing hate from ego invested Jezebels, but at least her critique will register for them. No man could write this critique and be taken seriously, and therein lies the danger in women co-opting the message the manosphere has been compiling for 12 years now. The environment is such that anything remotely critical a man might offer is instantly suspect of misogyny or personal (‘he’s bitter”) bias, however, couch that message in a female perspective, play Mrs. Doubtfire, and you’ll at least reach the audience beginning with something like validity.

Not surprisingly this element of message delivery is lost on most women. Adopting the male perspective seems novel, something that might set a woman apart in a sea of common fem-speak, but it’s important for Men to understand that anything positive a ‘pro-man’ female author has to offer is still rooted in her female reality. In girl-world, what directly benefits women necessarily is presumed to benefit men, so what we’ll see is a new wave of female bloggers bastardizing the world-worn ideas that the manosphere has put together and repackaging it in a female context. It’s Man Up 2.0; make a token push to “re-empower” men just enough for them to idealize the romanticism of the responsibilities required for living up to women’s expectations.

A major illustration of this can be found in the ‘late-to-the-party’ resurgence of masculine ideals in mainstream evangelical christianity today. Like so much else in christian culture, they’re happy to use the popularity of a secular phenomenon and repackage it as kosher, the manosphere is no exception. Hacks like Mark Driscoll and more than few other “relevant” new order evangelical pastors have co-opted manosphere (MRA?) fundamentals – even ‘purified’ forms of Game – as their particular cause du jour for returning men back into their roles of accountability to the female imperative. This of course has an overwhelming appeal to White Knight prone guys, but the push is disingenuous for the same reason ‘pro-men’ female writers are – they still use the girl-world, female imperative rule book to define their outlook.

I’m once again painfully reminded of how women believe that they are the only lasting authority and irrefutable arbiters of anything that has to do with personal relationships. They have, and continue to control the language of anything relationship. Just look at the comment threads of any relationship article. Every female response is written from a position of authority. The same women who can’t articulate anything informative in other contexts  can write absolute volumes about relationship by-laws, etiquette, formalities and how it’s men’s honor bound duty to comply with their reality in a comment post.

We are acculturated into a world where the ‘common sense’ is to presume that social dynamics should ALWAYS default to a feminine imperative. In essences everyone, male or female, should agree with any social dynamic that benefits the feminine. Without even an afterthought you are cast into what would benefit a feminine frame and a female ideal. To the feminine mind (of both women and feminized men) this is just the way the world is.

Men are simply facilitators for a feminine reality.


  1. I can’t complain too much about women getting recognition for this type of writing. I wouldn’t have discovered the red pill stuff if it weren’t for Glenn Reynolds at linking to a post by his wife.

  2. It is unfortunate that most females talk from a position of authority, concerning male/female relationships. But personally, I really don’t care. Women can hem and haw about the benefits of feminism and “female empowerment”, but the fact of the matter is one who engages in the Crimson Arts can counter what a lot of these women say. As an added bonus, when one refines himself to a positive masculine mindset, these same women uttering this nonsense usually fall for this man.

    I choose to never argue with women who discuss relationship theories. Even though this is a (true) cliche, women say one thing but their behavior is what to watch. And Game trumps every feminized social convention.

  3. As a(nominal) resident of christian subculture, I definitely agree with your assessment of ‘late-to-the-party’ here as with everything else, but I think you picked an unfortunate figurehead in Driscoll, who I think was saying basically what he’s saying now from the beginning back in 2000. I think he got famous concurrently with a broader recognition of game, so I can see how he would appear johnny-come-lately. Of course, my Dad taught me the basics back in junior high, so I recognize bullshit when I see it. Props to Pops. On the whole, evangelical christianity is a feminized wasteland. Pathetic. I do appreciate some of the specific terminology/routines from PUA’s for sure.

  4. I saw this at play this morning on Good Day NY (Fox 5, NYC). Skip to 3:30. Poor Greg Kelly has the unmitigated gall to suggest that Herman Cain’s accusers might not be noble in their pursuit of “justice.” In fact, what he’s really saying is, we don’t know the facts yet. But watch the crazy redhead fembot as she lays down the law when it comes to genders. Apparently her word is final – Cain has a penis; he’s guilty.

  5. Yeah, the cultural discourse certainly does favor women. All the same, everyone forgets that most people couldn’t give a fuck about the cultural discourse. There were retarded beta males who were whipped by their resource-hungry spouses before feminism arrived, and they’ll still be there after it departs.

    The only thing that game does for men is teach them to shift out of beta thought patterns and into alpha patterns. But those are generically programme social skills, they have nothing to do with culture.

    Do many people have a stupid culture at the moment? Sure. Nothing new there. Does it encourage beta thought patterns in order to benefit women? Certainly, although the men who are susceptible to it are the same ones that probably would have ended up beta anyways.

    And hey, beta males serve an important purpose in society. People like to complain that gamers call marriage and children beta. Like, yeah, it kinda is, it absolutely kills your testosterone levels, unless you’re Samuel L Jackson you’re gonna take a huge hit after kids. But society needs good fathers, and good fathers are often beta as fuck.

    Don’t make alpha status a virtue in itself. If you’re a man, you’re crazy if you don’t want to be alpha, but you’re also crazy if you want a society filled with other alphas.

  6. This can also be seen with Susan, as she is an erstwhile proponent of Game, but tends to mesh in a variety of conditions, qualifications and other caveats. Sometimes I read her stuff and just cringe at how even a professed anti-feminist still writes from the Team Woman perspective.

  7. What is most interesting is the self-deception. Looking for flaws all around but herself. ‘The Society made me do it…’ attitude is just hopeless.
    I guess it is harder for women to realize that a way to “happiness” goes through utter acceptance of oneself, taking responsibility for all that happens in your life and basically by escaping the control of one’s ego.

    Feminism is the ‘I am a woman therefore I am’ movement and can be blamed for propagating that, however blaming it for being idiot won’t help her. Blaming herself for being an idiot will.

  8. @Rollo:

    “Men are simply facilitators for a feminine reality.”

    Outstanding, brilliant analysis.

    This is the core, this is the gist of the cesspit that is modern society.

    And if we, as men, have any goal in the ‘Gender War’ it should be to change this fundamental fact.

    We need to tear down this feminist-fascist monstrosity and create in its stead…a robust, durable patriarchy that liberates men, gives them once more complete dominion over their household. And our presently feral western women *need* to be strictly reigned in. Virginity before marriage or societal disenfrachisement and shameful alienation.

    At the same time it should be the declared right of any man to ‘go his own way’ if he chooses not to become a ‘Pater Potentas’.

  9. Reading stuff like this gives me resentment like a Misogynist. I can understand equality but when women demand it without respect it just pisses me off.

    Not to long ago did we hunt their food and protect them and shit and now they piss on us.

    Don’t feel bad for being a player.

  10. The two supreme ironies of Kate Bollick’s essay are that:

    A) She relies on grand sociological explanations and dubious economic trends (“Most men today are immature and either unemployed or underemployed”) to explain away why she hasn’t found a quality man to marry, when in fact had one once upon a time she had such a man, but ended the relationship for abstract rather than concrete reasons. (The Alan referenced in her first paragraph)

    B) She is not quality relationship material herself.

    Ain’t karma a bitch? I guess solipsistic narcissism yields pretty bitter fruit.

  11. Sorry, syntax error in previous try at this comment:

    The two supreme ironies of Kate Bollick’s essay are that:

    A) She relies on grand sociological explanations and dubious economic trends (“Most men today are immature and either unemployed or underemployed”) to explain away why she hasn’t found a quality man to marry, when in fact once upon a time she had such a man, but ended the relationship for abstract rather than concrete reasons. (The Alan referenced in her first paragraph)

    B) She is not quality relationship material herself.

    Ain’t karma a bitch? I guess solipsistic narcissism yields pretty bitter fruit.

  12. Pingback: The Fade Away «
  13. @Hsd,
    if u or anyone is still reading comments …

    Qualifier on t-levels v. Kids …

    Research is:

    Highest levels: single man no kids prowling for mate
    2nd highest: father living w/his kids
    lowest: father, not living w/his kids

    One I doubt they reseacrhed: single father living w/his kids

    Living beta w/frumppy shit testing hypergamous harridan mother of your kids while u fatten up and ego implode … yeah, probably manboobzing low t.

    Raising kids on your own, succeeding in your career, having your healthy happy well groomed kids with you as evidence of competence and preselection while u manage them with equanimity and low voice calm while u hit the gym 5x/week pull ups, squats, bench press and wind sprints … high T and widely recognized as alpha, very alpha.

    Just follow it with nonhestitation, assume the sale and kino.

  14. Pingback: The Purple Pill |
  15. Hi, I would just like to say that I really admire and respect the work of Rollo Tomassi and others in the manosphere – it’s a timely revelation! My question is, I’m a woman and I’d like to help support the movement but after reading this article I’m worried that there’s not much that women like me can really do? You are quite right in observing that many women speak ‘authoritatively’ as if they are the voice of reason, and ultimately women are looking for the best deal for themselves. That’s true, I won’t deny that I believe women like me can benefit from a world that embraces these truths and principles. However, I don’t think the sexes need to be ‘at war’ with each other, in that it can only ever be either the feminine imperative or some ‘horrendous’ anti-women alternative that prevails – I may only speak for myself here, but I feel that women crave to be a part of masculine frame, it gives us support and structure and a sense of order in a difficult world. It makes us truly, sublimely happy. Which is why I’d like to support this movement, but I’m not really sure how. Any advice would be much appreciated, thank you.

  16. “We are acculturated into a world where the ‘common sense’ is to presume that social dynamics should ALWAYS default to a feminine imperative.”

    I suspect that historically, this imperative served society by discouraging out-of-wedlock birth and encouraging the formation and maintenance of families. That worked great in 1950, when women married at 20. But nowadays when women marry after 27, it just subsidizes their Sex In The City lifestyle.

  17. @Zoe I don’t think this is anything like intersectional feminism where white woman cant have a voice because they aren’t oppressed enough. What these articles are about is how the new pro-masculine message is subtlety undermined-even unintentionally-to become another form of feminine immparative. Re: Man Up = White Knight = serve woman’s interests. You can have a voice in promoting your opinions-voicing your support-just reflect more than the woman in the article if any kind of subliminal feminine immparitive is creeping in and subverting what you really want to say.

  18. Read the rm books. Primed. Now im looking ro put into practice and engage with new understanding. Id like to join up with an affordable coaching environment, bootcamp, or otherwise immersion based support system to facilitate tje rapid internalization of positive masculinity. Any tips on how to locate these master groups in los angeles?

Leave a Reply